Preacherwin’s Weblog

“And when I saw him, I fell toward his feet like a corpse, and he put his right hand on me, saying, ‘Fear not!  I am the first and the last, and I am the life.  I became dead, and behold, I am living into eternity.  And I hold the keys to death and hell.  Write, therefore, of what you saw, of what is, and of what is about to be after this.  The mystery of the seven stars which you saw in my right hand and the seven golden lampstands:  The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.’”

(Revelation 1: 17-20)

What is John’s response to being confronted by the risen Christ in all of his glory?  He falls on his face.  This is the proper response to such an experience.  It is the response of the prophets themselves (especially note the parallel in Daniel 10: 8-12).  We must ask ourselves the question, is this how we behave before God?  Is it our first instinct to collapse in utter unworthiness and fear and in worship of that which is infinitely greater than you?  Before you answer, remember that when you pray you come before the throne of God on high.  You don’t need a theophany to experience God, you just need a sincere and prayerful relationship with him.  Again, I place the question before you.  Does this describe your response to the creator of the universe?

I think that one of the problems in many of our churches today is that we take the privilege of worship and prayer all too lightly.  We think of worship as something we do to benefit God rather than our obligation toward him, and we think of prayer as something that we have a right to, rather than as the awesome privilege it is.  Seek to nurture a sense of holy fear when you enter before God’s throne.  Yes, approach with great joy and anticipation because of all he has done, but never forget that you have entered into the presence of something wholly supernatural and outside of your capacity to comprehend.

What is Jesus’ response to John?  Take courage, is ultimately what he says.  He reminds John that he is the firstborn from the dead and that he is the end of all things.  He was in existence before creation, and he will remake the new heavens and earth.  And all true life is in him.  There is no imagery here; Jesus is speaking truth plainly.  The emphasis is entirely on the work of Jesus, and is far from us.  And it is Jesus who holds the keys to hell.  Jesus describes himself as the doorway to heaven (John 14:6), but here Jesus is also reminding us that he holds the key even to damnation.  Jesus is the deciding factor when the sheep and the goats will be separated (Matthew 25: 31-46).

John is once again commissioned to write.  Twelve times in this book of Revelation, John is commanded to write.  It is a reminder of the lasting nature of this book and of Scripture itself.  It is also a reminder of the communal nature of faith.  God did not give John the vision for the purpose of cheering up John.  God gives this vision to John so that John will then share it with the churches.  Let us never forget, as we go through our daily lives, that God’s word is to be shared with others.  It will plant seeds in the lives of unbelievers and convict believers of their need to grow as well.

Lastly, Jesus explains to John two of the images that he has seen.  These two images, of course, will become quite important for they are the central part of the next two chapters of the book.  One of the reasons that people go back to the book of Daniel when trying to understand Revelation is that there are many stylistic similarities, not only in the images, but in the way that God is regularly explaining many of them to make sure that both the prophet and we gain understanding of what God is showing.  As we close with our section of introductions, we can already anticipate where John, being lead by the Holy Spirit, is headed.  Jesus is before him in glory and ready to conquer his foes.  We have been introduced to the King of the universe in this chapter, and he is commending us to stand at his side as he marches victorious in battle.  In the words of Isaac Watts’ classic hymn:

“Then let our songs abound, and every tear be dry;

We’re marching through Emmanuel’s ground,

We’re marching through Emmanuel’s ground,

to fairer worlds on high, to fairer worlds on high.

We’re marching to Zion,

beautiful, beautiful Zion;

We’re marching upward to Zion,

the beautiful city of God.”

Exegetical Insights:

Verse 9:

• The Greek word that John uses here for “perseverance” carries with it connotations of carrying on in boldness.  It is not simply surviving the onslaught, but bravely putting your face to the wind and moving into the time of trial.

Verse 11:

• The two verbs that John uses in this verse, “gravfw” (to write) and “pevmfw” (to send), are both imperatives.  They carry with them a sense of urgency.  With God there is no dilly-dallying when it comes to doing his will.

Verse 15:

• Notice the contrast in this verse with the deformed statue in Daniel’s vision (Daniel 2).  At best, Satan is only a poor counterfeit of Jesus.  Here Jesus is arrayed as the perfect priest and king, in Daniel’s vision, we see the attempts of Satan to build a kingdom, yet it will fall apart.

Verse 17: 

• The Gospel of John is filled with many “I am” statements of Jesus.  These statements are the claims of Christ to be the great “I am” of scripture.  Here, in this verse, we find another of Jesus’ “I am” statements brought to us through the Apostle John.
• “Fear Not” is the message from Jesus to John.  It is through God’s grace and by his mercy that we can stand in his presence.  Yet, while we must carry a reverential fear, God’s children must not be afraid in his presence—we are invited guests.

Verse 18:

• Jesus is living into eternity.  Never again will his sacrifice be necessary as Catholic theology would teach.

“And I turned back to see the voice that was speaking with me, and turning, I saw seven golden lampstands.  In the midst of the lampstands was one like the son of man, dressed in a long robe and with a golden belt wrapped around his chest.  As for his head, the hair was white like wool and like snow, and his eyes were like a flame of fire and his feet were as fine bronze as if having been burned in a furnace.  His voice was like the sound of much water, and he was holding seven stars in his right hand and from his mouth came a sharp, two-edged sword, and his face appeared like the sun in power.”

                                                                                    (Revelation 1: 12-16)

As we wrestle with understanding what John is actually seeing, I think that it is important first to look at the images themselves and then to put them together.  It is worth noting once again, that I hold that every image that is given to us in this book of Revelation either will be explained for us by John himself, or will be explained for us by the way the Old Testament uses those images.

Seven Golden Lampstands:  This image is one of the more straight-forward images in the book of Revelation because it is explained for us, yet, to understand its full ramifications, we must also look back at the Old Testament for explanation.  We are told in Revelation 1:20 that the lampstands refer to the seven churches that are listed above. 

Again, we must understand the churches as representative of the Church as a whole, through the ages.  We also must be reminded as to the purpose of the church, which is to proclaim God’s glory.  Jesus tells us in Matthew 5: 13-16 that the church is to be both salt and light.  Salt is a preservative, it prevents food from rotting as quickly.  Light illuminates the things that are hidden in the darkness.  The church must be about this kind of work.  We must be a preservative in our society and we must shine the light of the Gospel into even the darkest places.  Sadly, the church has rarely done this well.

But, there is far more here than initially meets the eye.  We need first go to Exodus 25: 31-40 to more fully understand what we are looking at.  Here we find another golden lampstand described.  This is what is commonly referred to as a menorah.  It consists of a vertical lampstand with three branches stretching out from either side.  In the tabernacle, the menorah stood just inside of the veil to the Holy Place.  As the priest would enter, the menorah would be on his left and the table of shew-bread was on his right.  In the rear of the Holy Place (between the Holy and the Holy of Holies) was the altar of incense.

The menorah symbolized the life that God gave to his people and the fidelity of the priesthood (and the fidelity of the God who has called the priests).  It also served the purpose of providing light inside of the temple at night. In the vision that the prophet Zechariah was given (Zechariah 4), the lamps on the menorah is described as “the eyes of Yahweh, which range across the whole earth.”  The image given to him is of God’s omnipotence and of God’s omnipresence, for they rove across the earth.  The Hebrew word for rove carries with it not only the connotations of going to and fro, but it carries with it the connotations of upturning things.  God is not only present in the world as a cosmic guide of some sort, but he is active turning lives and kingdoms upside down to accomplish his ends.

As we move back to Jesus, then, we see him in the presence of one of these menorahs.  There is some debate over whether John is seeing seven menorahs or whether he is seeing one menorah holding its seven lamps.  I would suggest that since there was only one menorah in the temple, since the Holy Spirit is described in Revelation 4:5 as seven torches of fire (not 49), and since the emphasis is on the fullness of Christ and his work, not on the fullness within the seven churches (remember that seven is a number of fullness and to suggest that each church had a fullness of testimony seems to deny Revelation 2&3), that we should see this as a single menorah which Christ is standing before, just as the High Priest in the temple would.  As High Priest, it is Jesus who lights or extinguishes the lamps of these churches. 

It is also worth noting that in the construction of the menorah, all of the lampstands were connected on the same base.  It is a reminder to us that no church, no denomination, and no individual Christian stands alone in this world.  We are part of the body of Christ, which means when our brother is persecuted, no matter where they happen to be or how far away they are from us, we hurt on their behalf.

Lastly, it is worth noting that Jesus is standing in the midst or in the presence of these lamps.  In the tabernacle, beside the menorah, stood the table of the presence or the table of shew-bread.  This was a holy table that held on it the bread of the presence of God.  There were twelve loaves of bread (representing the 12 tribes of Israel) that were consecrated as holy and laid upon this table.  Each Sabbath, the priests would eat this bread and then replace it with 12 new loaves.  Except for rare times of crisis, only the priests were allowed to eat this bread (see 1 Samuel 21). 

Largely, these loaves represented that the tribes of Israel were always in the presence of God.  Yet, John sees a vision of the lampstands apart from the bread of the presence.  Or does he?  I think that we can safely say that the bread of the presence is here, in Jesus.  No longer must the people of God be represented in a physical temple, because Jesus is the new temple, and his church is kept in him.  We, as Christians, have been consecrated as Holy by the work of Jesus, and in Jesus we are in the presence of God at all times, for Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father, enthroned over creation.

One like a son of man:  This was probably Jesus’ favorite name for himself (see Matthew 20:28 & Luke 9:44 for example).  Yet, we also must make note of the Old Testament’s use of title.  Oftentimes, when God is addressing a prophet (especially the prophet Ezekiel), God refers to him as “son of man.”  This title designates the lowliness of the person being referred to.  Jesus chose to take on flesh.  And though his taking on flesh did not demean his Godhood in any way, it was an act of infinite humility and degradation (Philippians 2:7). 

But we must attend, also to Daniel 7: 13-14.  For here, in Daniel’s vision, he witnesses “one like the son of man” receiving dominion over all the peoples of the earth.  Daniel is seeing a picture of what John will soon be seeing in Revelation 5.  This is Jesus, in both visions, receiving his rightful place of honor.  God revealed it to Daniel to point to the first coming of Christ, and is now revealing it to John to point to the second coming.

Clothed in a long robe and a golden belt:  There seems to be some degree of discussion as to the nature of Jesus’ robe and sash.  Some have suggested that these are judicial robes and others have suggested that these robes represent the dignity of Christ.  There is no doubting the dignity of our risen Lord or the fact that he is coming as Judge.  Yet, to gain a better understanding of these robes, we must again return to Exodus.

If we look at Exodus 28, we will see the instructions that God has given for the high priest’s garments.  He is to wear a long robe, a breastpiece, a tunic, turban, and a sash.  Here, we see Jesus with the robe and sash.  The tunic was worn beneath the robe, so it is not surprising that we are not given a description of it.  The breastpiece was used to hold the Urim and Thummim.  These stones were given to the high priest to aid in the discerning of God’s will.  Since Jesus is God himself, and the Father and Son are one in communication, Jesus needs no aides to discern God’s will.  Thus the breastpiece is unnecessary.

The golden belt or sash is like a wide girdle that goes around the torso of the wearer.  Josephus tells us that when this belt was worn low, it was used for labor or travel, but when it was worn about the chest, as we see here, it was an ornamental piece, which is how the priests wore theirs.

While the priestly connection is clear, we must go back to Daniel’s prophetic visions.  In Daniel 10:5, we see a man who very much resembles the description that John  gives us of Jesus.  In fact, the resemblance goes far further than his wardrobe, but it extends to the flaming eyes and glowing legs as well.  Likewise, Daniel’s response is the same as John’s (to fall down in fear).  Though the one Daniel met was not called “one like the son of man,” he is referred to as “one like the children of man.”  While this is not exactly the same language, I think that the same idea is being conferred.  Daniel’s meeting is with the pre-incarnate Christ.

Hairs like wool and white as snow:  The obvious connection to Daniel 7:9 must be made, where the Ancient of Days (God the Father) is described with hair like pure wool.  Yet, John is not getting his images confused.  There are two points that must be made here.  First, Jesus is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15).  If God the Father is described thus, then it is fitting that God the Son should be described thus.

Yet, there is something more going on here.  All of the imagery that we are given here is light imagery.  You have lampstands that illuminate the darkness representing the churches, you have stars in Jesus’ right hand representing the angels of the churches.  And Jesus is described with eyes flaming with fire, feet that glowed like molten metal, a face that shone like the sun at full strength, and a sash of gold around his chest.  Jesus is glowing brightly in the darkness of this world. 

The scriptures are filled with this kind of imagery.  Daniel’s vision was this way as was Ezekiel’s.  After Moses met with God on Sinai, his face shone brightly.  When Jesus was transfigured, he shone brightly.  John himself writes that God is light and in him is no darkness (1 John 1:5).  Jesus’ birth was heralded by a great light in the heavens and his resurrection was heralded by an angel that shone like lightning on that Easter morning.  I think that Jude alludes to this when he speaks of the fallen angels being kept in “eternal gloom” until judgment day (Jude 6).  When you have been in the presence of the God of creation in His full glory and majesty, even the brightest day on earth is as pitch blackness.

I think that the imagery here is not of white hair as one would think of the aged, but of an illuminated person, where all of them glows with a white glow.  Probably the easiest way to illustrate this would be to have someone, no matter what their hair color, stand in front of a large spotlight.  When the spotlight is turned on, their hair will take on a whitish glow, even if the hair is as black as India ink.  Turn up the wattage a million-fold and then you will begin to get the idea of what John is seeing.  Jesus is there, speaking to him, and electricity is coursing through the air.  It is positively breathtaking—which is what happens with John, he falls down like a dead man.

Eyes Like Fire and Feet like molten bronze:  Again, we have light imagery.  When Jesus came in his first incarnation, he came as a meek servant and as a sacrifice.  Now we see Jesus clothed with his rightful power and authority.  There is no mistaking that this is king and God over the universe and that he is rightfully worshipped.  It is also worth noting that this is military imagery.  Soon we will see the sword, but fiery eyes denote power and might—a blessing for Christ’s church, but for Christ’s enemies, as James says in the second chapter of his epistle top the church, they tremble.  Bronze was a metal still in use for warfare at this point in history because it is harder than iron, and here Jesus’ feet are portrayed as armored, ready to crush the head of his enemy. 

A Voice like Much Water:  Have you ever stood in front of a waterfall and tried to have a conversation?  It is nearly impossible.  This is the idea that John is trying to get across.  Jesus’ voice is booming and loud.  It is almost deafening.  Again, we not only see Jesus speaking with authority, but the “bigness” of what is happening is being emphasized.  Jesus is speaking in such a way that cannot be denied or ignored.  It is also worth looking at Daniel 10:6, which describes Jesus’ voice as like the sound of a multitude of people.  Whether it be a flood of water or a flood of persons, the image is the same, Jesus demands that all eyes and ears be brought into focus on himself—and rightfully so.

Seven Stars in His right hand:  First of all, the right hand was a symbol of authority and power.  People were given the right hand of fellowship when they were acknowledged as part of a group.  Jesus sat at the right hand of the Father after the resurrection.  The right hand was also the hand that you used to attack.  Your sword was held in the right hand and the defensive shield was held in the left. 

Again, John tells us the explanation of this symbol.  The stars represent the angels of the seven churches.  Here we see a picture of these angels being under the sole authority of Christ himself.  Any power or any work that these angels might do is at the discretion of Jesus.  Again, we see Jesus here not as the servant but as the reigning king.

Now, there is a great deal of debate about the nature of these angels.  The Greek word, a[ggeloV, which is used here literally means “messenger.”  In Greek, this can refer to either a human messenger or a supernatural one.  Many have debated as to which John is referring to here in Revelation.  The primary argument for suggesting that these angels are human ones is that each of the subsequent seven letters are addressed to the “angel” of the church in …  I would like to put forward several reasons for seeing these angels as supernatural beings.

1. The term a[ggeloV is used 171 times in the New Testament.  Of those times, it is only used 7 times to refer to human messengers.  John himself uses the term 70 times between his Gospel and The Revelation (the term is not used in his 3 epistles), and in every instance (apart from these few debated instances) John uses the term exclusively to refer to supernatural beings.
2. Outside of the New Testament canon, in other pieces of apocalyptic literature, the term a[ggeloV is never used to refer to a human messenger.
3. Generally, in scripture, the image of stars represents supernatural beings of power and authority (Isaiah 14: 12-13, Daniel 12:3, Jude 13).  In fact, Jesus himself is referred to as the bright morning star (Numbers 24:17, Revelation 22:16).
4. Angels are recorded as functioning as defenders and protectors of specific people and groups.  The Archangel Michael had been given charge over the people of Israel (Daniel 12:1).  Angels intercede for little children before God (Matthew 18:11).  They may function as witnesses (1 Timothy 5:21) and can be seen pronouncing God’s word to his people (Judges 2:1-4, Luke 1).  Likewise, while the precise interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:10 is hotly debated, there seems to be a sense that angels are present with Christians when they gather to worship.
5. Lastly, I think that this is the natural reading of the text, remembering the apocalyptic nature of this book.  These are spiritual visions that John is having, not earthly ones.  Later in the visions we will see that the true church is sealed and protected against the worst of the tribulations.  It seems to fit with the tone of this book to see heavenly beings as being a part of the protecting of these seven churches.

Does this mean that we should adopt a theology of guardian angels?  I think that the scriptures are remarkably silent about this issue.  Why?  Because the object of our worship must not deviate from Christ, and our sense of assurance that we will not fail must come from Him.  It is in God’s hand that we rest and it is by God’s grace that we persevere.  Christ may use his angels in the guarding and guiding of his church, but they are acting under orders of the king.  It is for Christ’s glory that we either live or die; He does not need to entrust us to his underlings.

A Two-Edged Sword came from his Mouth:  We would be remiss if we did not look to Hebrews 4:12:

“For the Word of God is living and effective, cutting more than all two-edged swords, penetrating until it divides soul and spirit, joint and marrow, and a discerner of the thoughts and the intents of the heart.”

This image is portrayed for us vividly.  Christ is the word of the Lord made flesh, and the words of his mouth convict of sins and for some, will condemn to eternal damnation. 

Yet, once again, we need to remind ourselves of the military and kingly overtones that are in this passage.  Christ has come as king and ruler.  This means blessing for some, but for Christ’s enemies, it means that they will face the sword.

His face shone Like the Sun at Full Strength:  Once again, we are confronted with light imagery.  Jesus does nothing small.  This image should take our minds immediately back to Exodus 34: 29-33, where Moses, after speaking with the Lord, came down with a shining face.  But it also ought to make us think of the transfiguration of Christ himself (Matthew 17), where Jesus was transfigured and his face became bright like the sun.  When even the smallest hint of heaven shines through this veil of sin that blankets the world, it is blinding to the eye.  Paul says for now we see as if through a glass darkly (1 Corinthians 13:12), but here, as he saw on the mountain of transfiguration all of those years earlier, John sees Jesus clearly, and the image is blinding.

*****

So, what is the point of all of this?  When looking at most of the prophetic calls, one thing is consistent: God makes himself known in a big way.  For Isaiah, it was a vision of heavenly worship that he witnessed, and it rocked the temple.  For Jeremiah, it was the voice of God and the actual touch of God’s hand on his mouth.  For Ezekiel, it was of the angels carrying the Ark of the Covenant and of Christ exalted.  For Daniel, it was a similar face-to-face with the pre-incarnate Jesus. 

This vision that John is having is an affirmation that God is in control and that Christ reigns.  John lives in a pagan world that is persecuting and martyring Christians.  His world is a world where Roman emperors demand the worship of their citizens.  John’s world is a world where cults abound and cities are dedicated to false gods.  Yet John sees Christ walking in power and authority amongst his churches.  Christ has the angels of the churches in his hand, ready to be dispatched, and the sword of Christ is drawn and at ready.  What is coming will break the back of the enemies of the risen King.

“It said: ‘Write what you see into a book and send it to the seven churches; to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamum, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicia.’”

(Revelation 1:11)

Here we have John’s specific task.  One thing of interest is the contrast between the specific call of John and that of the Old Testament prophets.  When God calls to them, he calls them to speak (Isaiah 6:9, Jeremiah 1:9, Ezekiel 3:1, Hosea 2:1, etc…).  John is called to write.  In fact, Nahum is the only Old Testament prophet whose writings are introduced as a book (Nahum 1:1). 

In the case of Revelation, Jesus is the one doing the speaking, as he is the true prophet.  John, as his servant, is given the commission to write that which has been spoken for the edification of the church.  Like the faithful servants of the Old Testament prophets, John faithfully transcribes that which Jesus is relaying to him.

It is also worth noting that the churches are listed in order that the letter would probably be delivered.  Patmos was 50 miles off the coast of Ephesus (it was actually in the domain of Miletus, another Asian city, but one where we have no record of a first century church).  It would be read in Ephesus and copied for their own use and then transferred to the next church on the list.  The cities are listed in clockwise order as you would travel through the Roman region of Asia along primary thoroughfares.

“I John, your brother and participant in the suffering, the kingdom, and the perseverance in Jesus: I was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.  I was in the spirit in the day that belongs to the Lord and I heard behind me a voice as great as a trumpet.”

(Revelation 1: 9-10)

Again, John states his name.  What is interesting about this is the contrast between John’s statement and the statement of the Old Testament prophets.  The Old Testament prophets almost always gave their pedigree.  Isaiah was the son of Amoz, Jeremiah was the son of Hilkiah, Ezekiel was the son of Buzi, Joel was the son of Pethuel, Jonah was the son of Amittai, etc…  Yet, any form of lineage is absent from John’s introduction.  He does not even list the region that he hails from as many of the prophets do.

What are we to make of this?  It is a reminder that as Christians, our lineage is in Christ and in him alone.  In the Old Testament times, when they were still looking forward with anticipation, there was a need to stand in the authority of their forbears.  As Christians, though we stand gratefully on the shoulders of those who have gone before us in faith, we do not stand on tradition for tradition’s sake.  All we do and all we accept of those who have gone before us, must be judged against the same rule of scripture.  There is no authority for the Christian but God’s word, and there is no lineage either biological or theological that is of any value apart from Christ.  John’s pedigree is “Christian,” and that is enough.

And what role does John play in the larger scheme of things?  John simply says that he is a fellow participator in the things of God.  Like the other writing apostles, John places no merit in his position as an apostle.  He does not use it to rule in authority over men—though as an apostle, he has greater authority over men—but considers himself a brother in faith to his people.  Jesus said, “if anyone wishes to be first, he is to be last of all and servant of all” (Mark 9:35b).  The apostles understood this well and it would do us well to understand this better.

Also note the close connection between suffering, perseverance, and the kingdom of God that John makes.  It is a reminder of Jesus’ words at the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount:

“Blessed are the ones who have been persecuted in the name of righteousness, for to them is the kingdom of heaven.  Blessed are you when they reproach you, persecute you, and say evil and lies of you because of me.  Rejoice and Exalt!  For your reward is great in heaven.  For thus they persecuted the prophets who came before you.”

(Matthew 5:9-12)

To those who would suggest that Christians ought not to suffer—that God only wants us healthy, wealthy, and wise—I commend to you the scriptures.  God’s word consistently tells us that if we are followers of Christ, we will have trials in our life, and they will be abundant.  The world hates the Lord who we serve and we ought to expect to be treated with contempt (John 15:20). 

Why is this?  James tells us that through trial we grow in faith and faith brings perseverance (James 1: 2-4).  In fact, with this in mind, trial is not a curse, but a blessing for it brings us closer to God if we persevere.  Why is this important to bring out?  Because the dispensationalist will tell you that God is going to remove the elect from the world before the great tribulations of Revelation begin.  I ask then, why would God deny his church such a great blessing and privilege as to persevere through even the greatest tribulation? 

Next, John not only gives us his location as he received the revelation, but he further connects himself to the people who are suffering in persecution to whom he is writing.  John is in exile because of his witness and preaching of Jesus.  Living in a modern society, I find John’s state interesting.  We live in an age where we strive to protect our leaders from suffering.  Generals designate their authority to lesser commanders and so forth, orchestrating the battles from a safe distance.  Most church pastors have adopted this mentality.  They tend to do very little “hands on” evangelism and ministry—especially if they serve a large congregation—in favor for training others to do the task.

Don’t get me wrong, there is no way that a pastor can do everything in a church, but because they cannot do everything, many pastors take that to mean that they are not obligated to do anything.  Here we have John, the last living apostle, probably one of the few, if not only, men alive at this point that actually spoke with Jesus face to face, and he is suffering in exile because of his preaching.  John’s example should serve as a reminder to all who would shepherd God’s flock that they will have to sleep under the stars.

Patmos was a little island (about 35 miles in circumference), about 50 miles off the shore of Ephesus in the Aegean Sea.  Roman Emperors would often exile political prisoners on the island.  In this instance, under the reign of Domitian, John is exiled.  We don’t know the details of what got him sentenced apart from the fact that it was because of his faithful testimony to the Gospel.  We learn from Josephus, the Jewish historian, that John was given a pardon after Domitian’s death by Nerva in 96 A.D. and returned to Ephesus.  John was the only Apostle not to suffer the death of a martyr, though he did experience persecution.

John tells us next that it was the Lord’s Day and he was “in the Spirit.”  Though some will debate it, this is pretty clear evidence that by this point, for the Christian, the Sabbath had been moved from Saturday to Sunday (from the last day of the week to the first).  We do this primarily to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus, but it is important for us not to stop there in our understanding of the Christian Sabbath.

Most of the earliest Christian converts were Jewish as well as being Christian.  In fact, they would not have seen a contradiction between the two.  Christianity was the fulfillment of all that Judaism had anticipated.  In practice, then, they usually celebrated both the Saturday Sabbath and the Sunday Sabbath. 

Yet, as Gentiles flooded into the church through the missionary efforts of those like Paul, the Gentiles were not expected to keep all of the requirements that had been placed on the Jews.  The food laws and the circumcision laws were not applied to them.  In fact, the Jerusalem counsel only mandated four restrictions (Acts 15:19-20):

1. Abstain from things polluted by idols
2. Abstain from sexual immorality
3. Abstain from food that has been strangled
4. Abstain from eating meat that has the blood still in it

Not being required to conform to Jewish tradition, the gentile Christians tended only to keep the Christian, or Sunday, Sabbath, not both. 

  In 70 AD, the Romans came in and sacked Jerusalem, destroying the temple.  When they did this, they went out of their way to eliminate potential pockets of resistance and groups that might form an insurrection.  This helped to drive the wedge even deeper between Christians and Jews, until there was a fairly distinct separation between Christian and Jewish Sabbaths.

Yet, the change from Saturday to Sunday Sabbath-keeping was not simply a historical issue, but a theological issue.  It is important to note the comparison.  In the Old Testament, God’s people are commanded to keep the Sabbath for the following reasons:

1. To rest from the labors of the week (Genesis 2:1-3)
2. To commemorate God’s creative work (Exodus 20:11)
3. To commemorate God’s consecration of His people as a holy and set apart (Exodus 31:12-15)
4. To gather as a people in the name of God (Leviticus 23:1-3)
5. To commemorate God’s redemption of His people (Deuteronomy 5:12-15)

As Christians, we look to Christ’s completed work for our hope and as the focus of our Sabbath day.  In turn, we keep the Sabbath for the same reasons, but with a Christological focus.  As Christ was resurrected on Sunday and the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost on Sunday, we celebrate our Sabbath on Sunday. 

1. The Christian Sabbath is still a needed rest from the labors of the week.
2. Not only do we commemorate God’s creative work, which was begun on a Sunday, but we anticipate God’s re-creative work in the new heavens and the new earth, which was secured on a Sunday, as it is Christ’s resurrection that secured for us an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading (1 Peter 1:4).
3. We commemorate God’s election, setting us apart as a holy priesthood (1 Peter 1:14-16).
4. We gather as a people in the name of the Lord.
5. To commemorate God’s redemption of His people, not only through the history of redemption, but also in the saving work of Jesus, through which we have been redeemed from our bondage to sin and are being prepared for eternity with Christ in heaven.  Because Christ is resurrected, we have the hope of resurrection as well (Romans 8:29, Colossians 1:18).

John also tells us that he was “in the Spirit” when he received the revelation from Jesus.  While there is some discussion as to just what John means, we can at least say that John was involved in worship.  We can say this for a number of reasons.  First of all, his vision was on Sunday, as we previously discussed, which is a day set apart for the worship of God.  Secondly, scripture encourages us to pray with the guidance of the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:26, Jude 20).  And third, we see in Isaiah’s call and probably in Jeremiah’s call, that they were in the context of worship (for are not our souls best prepared for God’s call in this context?).  Isaiah was serving in the temple when God called him.  Though we do not know the context that Jeremiah was in when God called, we do know that he was a priest who resided in the city of Anathoth, which is less than 3 miles from Jerusalem. 

Some will argue that this is referring to a prophetic state that John was in.  John certainly ended up in that state, but to imply that John was in the prophetic state prior to the theophany is difficult to support.  Throughout the scriptures, the Holy Spirit is found to be descending on people in a prophetic way (1 Samuel 19:20-24, Ezekiel 2:2, Acts 10:10, 2 Corinthians 12:2), but what is consistent is that the person has no control over the timing of it.  God is sovereign not only in his creation and his election, but he is sovereign even in his revelation of himself.  My suggestion is that John was involved in sincere prayer and worship and God chose that very appropriate time to reveal himself to him.

We then hear the voice that calls to John from behind.  It is worth noting the imagery that John uses here: it is loud like a trumpet.  Trumpets are used in the Old Testament for a variety of reasons.  It is used to call people together for worship (Exodus 19:13, Leviticus 25:9) or for warfare (Judges 3:27, Nehemiah 4:20).  They were used in worship (Psalm 150:3) and to announce a new king over God’s people (1 Kings 1:34).  But there is one usage that carries over from the Old Testament into the New, and that is the use of trumpets to announce the presence of the Lord (Exodus 19:16-19, Isaiah 27:13, Matthew 24:31, 1 Corinthians 15:52, etc…).  Here John is in the presence of the Lord.

Here is a visual history of English Bibles and their historical/philosophical family trees.  Note that these studies are works in progress as they were begun a number of years ago and as new translations of the Bible are always being developed.

win

bible-versions

I.  Greeting (1:1-2)

II.  God in his Grace is raising you out of your sin to salvation (1:3-12)

            1.  God has given us new birth to a greater inheritance (1:3-5)

            2.  God will keep that inheritance while you are being sanctified through

persecutions (1:6-7)

            3.  The joy of that salvation in your hearts and in the hearts of those who have

pointed to Christ from old (1:8-12)

III.  Therefore, be holy for God is holy (1:13-25)

            1.  Live your life obediently and in anticipation of what is coming (1:13-16)

            2.  God has redeemed you by the blood of Jesus Christ (1:17-21)

            3.  God has purified you through his imperishable word (1:22-25)

IV.  Therefore, live your lives to reflect God’s good work in you (2:1-3:22)

            1.  Rid yourself of sinful ways and nourish yourself on spiritual things (2: 1-3)

            2.  God has made you a holy nation, built on the Living foundation stone of Jesus

Christ (2:4-12)

            3.  Live in submission to authorities outside of the home (2:13-25)

            4.  Live in submission to authorities inside of the home (3:1-7)

            5.  Living submissively in spite of persecution brings you blessing and the

persecutor shame (3:8-17)

            6.  Look to your baptism as a reminder of Christ’s past work and its eventual

completion (3:18-22)

V.  Therefore, since Christ was persecuted, expect to be persecuted yourselves (4:1-19)

            1.  Misery loves company and will seek to drag you down into their sin (4:1-6)

            2.  Yet, judgment is coming, so be prepared (4:7-11)

            3.  Do not be surprised by your sufferings, but take joy in them (4:12-19)

VI.  Closing remarks to church leaders (5:1-11)

            1.  Be good shepherds, modeling your service on Christ, the Chief Shepherd

(5:1-4)

            2.  Live humble lives (5:5-7)

            3.  Resist the enemy in faith and persevere until the end (5:8-11)

VII.  Personal remarks and closing blessing (5:12-14)

I.  Greeting (1:1-2)

II.  God’s Call on the life of a Christian and the Christian’s response (1:3-11)

            1.  God’s calling His people to glory (1:3-4)

            2.  The Christian’s response to God’s call (1:5-11)

                        a.  progression of faith to love (1:5-7)

                        b.  work to grow in grace (1:8-11)

III.  Purpose (1:12-15)

IV.  Defense of Apostolic and Scriptural authority (1:16-21)

            1.  Defense of Apostolic authority (1:16-1

            2.  Defense of Scriptural authority (1:19-21)

VI.  Warnings against false teachers (2:1-22)

            1.  Warning of their imminent arrival (2:1-3)

            2.  Warnings from history and God’s Faithfulness through history (2:4-10)

                        a.  the fall of the angels (2:4)

                        b.  the fall of the ancient world and salvation of Noah’s family (2:5)

                        c.  the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah and salvation of Lot’s family (2:6-

                        d.  reminder of God’s competence in saving his people from trial (2:9-10)

            3.  Description of the false teachers (2:11-17)

            4.  Warning about the road these teachers travel along (2:18-22)

V.  The second coming of Christ, the imminent judgment of ungodly, and the new

                        heavens and the new earth (3:1-13)

            1.  Have confidence in Christ’s promise to return (3:1-9)

            2.  Have confidence that Judgment is coming (3:10-12)

            3.  Have confidence in the remaking of heaven and earth (3:13)

VI.  Closing exhortation (3:14-1

            All translations are interpretations.  This is for two reasons.  First is that English grammar is different than Greek or Hebrew grammar.  A truly literal word for word translation would prove extraordinarily difficult to read.  Secondly, in Greek and Hebrew, as with English, words often carry a variety of meanings depending on the context in which they are used. 

            Translators must make the decision as to what English words best represent the original text and they must write the grammar in such a way that the translation reflects the grammatical emphasis of the original.  In doing so, it is impossible to translate without being influenced by your religious biases.  The other challenge that you face in translation is in how you express a first century idea in twenty-first century language.  This depends on how well you understand not only both cultures but also in understanding the context that surrounds the text.

            And, you must also have an understanding of the Bible as a whole.  God planned out history in intimate detail, and he wrote his scriptures and preserved them for his people.  Thus, how we interpret scripture ought to reflect God’s decisive hand in its creation but also the consistency and inerrancy that belongs to his written word.   That being said, there are Three general philosophies behind Bible translation: Formal Equivalence, Dynamic Equivalence, and Paraphrasing.

Formal Equivalence:  This is as close to a literal translation as you will find.  The philosophy is to translate the original text on a word for word basis into contemporary language.  The main advantage of this approach is that it gives you a more accurate word for word correspondence with the original text.  This makes word studies, where you trace a particular word’s usage through the Bible, more straightforward.  The drawback is that the language can often become fairly wooden and awkward to read. 

There is another issue regarding formal equivalence translations that is hotly debated as to whether it is a strength or a weakness.  Because the English language is often vague and sometimes less precise than the Greek and Hebrew languages, sometimes a literal translation on a word for word basis leaves important theological concepts open to the reader’s interpretation.  These concepts are usually clear in the original text, but become less clear when translated on a word for word basis into the English.  Formal equivalence tries to minimize the translator’s interpretation of the text.

Dynamic Equivalence:  The response to the problem of ambiguity within formal equivalence translations is dynamic equivalence.  Rather than translating on a word for word basis, dynamic equivalence translates on a thought for thought or a concept for concept basis.  This does involve more interpretation of the original text, but often can deliver a reading that is closer to the original intent.   This translation often provides a more fluid reading of the text, but it does sacrifice a degree of precision when it comes to word studies.

Paraphrase:  Sometimes called “free translation,” this mode of Bible translation is hotly debated.  A paraphrase is the converting of the original text, or for most paraphrases, as translation, into your own words.  Oftentimes this kind of translation can be very approachable for pleasure reading, but is not precise enough to do serious Bible study.  Also, this kind of translation involves a great degree of interpretation, and depending on the translator’s biases, biblical doctrines may be obscured or given undue weight.

            Obviously, these are very broad categories and they allow a great deal of overlapping.  It is probably most accurate to picture these definitions on a chart with formal equivalence on one end and paraphrasing on the other, with dynamic equivalence being a middle ground.  Each translation, then would fall somewhere on the chart, leaning toward one of the definitions, but being influenced by the others.

            Regardless of their strengths and weaknesses, all three have their value.  Formal equivalence translations are often best for serious Bible study, but dynamic equivalence is better for more casual reading and public reading of scripture.  It is far more accessible both to younger people and to new Christians.  While paraphrases are not my particular cup of tea, many find that they are quite good for pleasure reading.  It just must be cautioned that a more technical translation of the Bible should be accessible for worship and study.

            Regardless of your translation philosophy, the end goal is the same.  We want the word of God to be read and understood by the people of God.  People have different educational backgrounds and are at different levels of faith when they go to pick up this wonderful book.  As Paul writes in Romans 1:16, “I am not ashamed of the Gospel for it is the power of God to salvation.”  If the word of God is to be brought to bear on the lives of God’s people, it must be understood.  Different translations for different seasons in different people’s lives is the reason that we have so many versions to choose from when we go the Bible book store.

            This is a major hotbed of debate within evangelical circles, particularly since the new revision of the New International Version (NIV), Today’s New International Version (TNIV), has gone this route.  Most evangelicals consider this move to be a sell-out to the liberal feminist movement, but some hotly argue that it better reflects current language usage.  Currently, the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), Today’s New International Version (TNIV), the Revised English Bible (REB), The New Century Version (NCV), the Contemporary English Version (CEV), and the New Living Translation (NLT) are the translations that have opted toward gender neutral language.

            The philosophy behind gender neutral translations is that the use of the masculine “he” as a generic term to refer to both male and females is no longer the commonly accepted usage in the English language.  The solution that they propose is to make the language plural.  “He” becomes “they” and “his” becomes “their.”  References that are specific to a particular person are left alone, only the general references are changed.  Admittedly, there is a move within the liberal community to incorporate gender neutral language to refer to God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, but to the best of my knowledge, none of the above translations mentioned as gender neutral have adopted this philosophy.

            The danger of pluralizing the language is important to discuss.  In some instances, the change is quite harmless.  For example, James 1:26 reads in the NIV:

“If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless.”

In the TNIV, it reads:

“Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless. “

Yet, in many cases, the gender neutral language either obscures doctrine or the personal nature of salvation, allowing for a reading that is more acceptable to the Roman Catholic church.

            For example, John 14:23 reads:

“If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.” (RSV)

Yet, the NRSV reads:

“Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them and we will come to them and make our home with them.”

This may seem to be a slight change given the overall intention is that this verse is addressed to both men and women, yet it has profound implications.  First, Jesus did not speak in plurals, he spoke in singulars.  He wanted to make a point of emphasizing the personal nature of salvation.  Salvation is an individual thing, not a corporate thing as the Roman Catholic church would teach.  Jesus did not generically die for every believer, he died for each believer, and pluralizing the language obscures this important fact.

            Making the pronouns plural also obscures many of the Old Testament prophesies about Jesus.  For example:

“He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken.” (Psalm 34:20, RSV)

The gender inclusive version renders this verse:

“He keeps all their bones; not one of them will be broken.” (Psalm 34:20, NRSV)

This completely obscures the messianic prophesy that David is making in this psalm.

            At times, changing the singular to plural completely changes the meaning of the verse.  For example, Psalm 19:12a is changed from “who can discern his errors” (NIV) to “who can discern their errors” (TNIV).  At first glance, with this verse entirely out of context, this change does not seem too threatening.  Yet, when you realize that the preceding verses of Psalm 19 are dealing with the perfection of God’s law.  Verse 12 is taking that law and then applying it to the individual, as Paul does in Romans, to remind us that we cannot know our errors without God’s good and perfect laws.  Yet, the TNIV, when “he” is translated “their” shifts the meaning of the verse to look as if God’s laws are the ones that have errors.  The TNIV reads like this:

“The Law of the Lord is perfect…,The statutes of the Lord are trustworthy…, the precepts of the Lord are right…, the commands of the Lord are radiant…, they are more precious than gold…, who can discern their errors.”  (Psalm 19: 7-12, TNIV)

            Oftentimes, the word “man” is simply omitted.  In verses where the text reads “men and brethren,” the TNIV simply omits the term “man” altogether.  Also, of the 61 times that the term “Saint” is used in the New Testament, the TNIV has omitted 53 altogether in favor of “God’s people.”  The term saint carries connotations of holiness and being set apart.  It is a term of endearment given to the saved people of God.  The change does two things.  First of all, it reduces changes the emphasis from personal salvation to a corporate sense, as the Roman Catholic church likes to teach.  Secondly, it emphasizes the Roman Catholic belief that “sainthood” is only for a privileged few.

            Our salvation comes from a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, not membership within the church.  The church is a sacred institution because individuals who make up the body of Christ are saved and sanctified by the work of Christ.  Christ did not die to save an institution, but to save a people who gather together as part of an institution.  As Martin Luther cried out, we are saved by grace and grace alone!  There is no coincidence that the gender neutral translations are accepted by the Roman Catholic church, for these gender neutral translations obscure many of the holy doctrines that the protestants fought and died to proclaim.

            There are nearly 2000 citations that evangelical scholars have addressed showing the dangers of gender neutral translations.  In terms of casual reading, these changes may or may not be particularly noticeable, but for serious Bible study, they are a definite stumbling block.  We need to hold translators to the highest standards of translations and be very careful of the biases that they bring to the table of interpretation.  We also ought to ask ourselves, has the English language really changed that much as to make terms like “mankind,” that use the masculine in an inclusive way, offensive to the average person?  Personally, I don’t think so.

            There are a plethora of different Bible translations available for the Christian to choose from.  Some are better and some are worse.  All come from a devout desire to make the written word of God accessible to people of all cultures, languages, and walks of life.  This is not meant to be an exhaustive overview, but is meant to be more of a snapshot of the available options.

The Revised Version of 1881 and the American Standard Version of 1901:  With new archaeological and linguistic evidence available, it was deemed appropriate that the King James Version be revised and reworked.  This lead to two versions being published: the Revised and the American Standard Versions in England and America respectively.  These reflected both more modern speech and the most current linguistic scholarship of the day. 

Scofield Bible:  In 1909, Cyrus Scofield published the King James Version of the Bible with his own footnotes much in the same way as the earlier Geneva Bible had done.  Scofield was a Congregationalist pastor but had been ordained in the Southern Presbyterian church (although he never served a Presbyterian congregation).  Scofield was a dispensationalist in this theology, which set him apart from the Covenantal theology of his Reformed heritage.  This becomes quite apparent when you begin to study his notes on the Second Coming of Christ.  It is important that the Christian be aware of his biases before committing to the use of his notes.  Regardless of your theological bias, Scofield’s theology has had a tremendous influence on the American church.  His influence is can especially be seen in the Southern Baptist church and in the literature of the Moody Bible Institute.

Moffat Bible:  Scottish theologian and Oxford professor, James Moffat completed his translation of the Bible in 1924.  He also served as editor of a New Testament commentary series that utilized his translation.  His translation never became widely circulated, but copies still turn up from time to time.  While Moffat was not always orthodox in his thinking, his translation often grasps the literary intent as well as the meaning of the poetic books of the Old Testament.

Revised Standard Version:  In 1952, the American Standard Version was revised in a somewhat less literal, but more readable form.  The intent of this translation was to provide a more ecumenical translation that would be acceptable to Catholics and Protestants alike.  The RSV and the later revision in 1989, the New Revised Standard Version, are probably the most widely used texts in mainline Protestant denominations.

New American Standard Bible:  Another revision of the American Standard Version is the New American Standard Bible, published in 1960.  This is probably the most literal translation of the original texts available today.  It is the result of the work of 58 evangelical scholars from a variety of denominations so carries a good balance of literal translation as well as keeping doctrinal intent sound.  This is one of the best study Bibles available today.

Amplified Bible:  Because many words carry wider connotations in the original languages than in the English translation, in 1965, scholars were led to create the Amplified Bible.  This translation includes in italics the various synonymous words that the original word implies.  Readers then can insert one or more of these words to hopefully better convey the original intent of the text.  While it can be awkward to read for personal edification and study, it has been often used by revival preachers who want greater emphasis on particular words in the texts from which they are preaching.

Today’s English Version (Good News Bible):  In 1966, the American Bible Society published a new translation in contemporary English.  This version intentionally uses colloquial language in its translation.  In 1991 it was revised to become the Contemporary English Version.  The CEV similarly uses colloquialisms and is written on about a 5^th grade level to make it accessible to a broader audience.

New English Bible:  This 1970 translation done in England carried a heavy British flavor.  Its revision, the Revised English Bible, in 1989 removed many of these idioms, but still kept an English flair.  It is a popular translation for public reading as it keeps much of the traditional poetic flair of the older King James Version.

Living Bible:  In 1971, the American Standard Version was paraphrased to create the Living Bible.  The New Living translation, published in 1996, was not a paraphrase, but a new translation although it kept much of the readability of its predecessor.

New International Version:  In 1978, the New International Version was published which has turned out to be one of the most popular translations amongst evangelical Christians.  It maintains a good balance between readability and technical accuracy.  The latest revision of the NIV, Today’s New International Version, published in 2002, has created a stir in the evangelical churches who were loyal to it because it went to a gender neutral translation (see above). 

Readers Digest Condensed Version:  While this translation, published in 1982, sounds somewhat humorous to more mature Christians, this translation was headed up by Bruce Metzger, a respected Bible scholar, with the intent of making the scriptures more accessible to un-churched people.  Better than half a million copies were sold of this translation, but leaves open questions as to the dangers that abound when you edit and condense the word of God.

New King James Version:  Another 1982 publication was more well received than the Readers Digest Version.  The New King James Version offers more contemporary language than the Earlier King James Version. 

International Children’s Bible:  This translation of 1986 was the result of the collaboration of translators that worked on the New American Standard Bible, The New King James Version, and the New International Version of the Bible.  Their plan was to create a translation that is specifically designed for use by children.  It is written on a third grade educational level and uses short sentences with easily understood language.  Its revision, the New Century Version of 1991 was marketed more for adults, but kept the third grade reading level.

The Message:  In 1993, Eugene Peterson published his own New Testament.  While this is technically a new translation of the Ancient Greek, stylistically it is closer to a paraphrase as many thoughts are added to convey the meaning of the text and it is written to read like a novel.  Peterson also dropped the verse notations from his translation which makes serious Bible Study more challenging.  Many Christians enjoy reading this translation casually, but it is not meant to be a primary Bible for study and worship.

Holman Christian Standard Bible:  Published in 2000, this English translation was commissioned by the Southern Baptist Publishing House and was produced by a team of 90 scholars from a variety of denominations.  This translation tries to balance Formal and Dynamic Equivalence methods to create a readable but literal translation. 

English Standard Version:  Published in 2001, the ESV is an evangelical revision of the RSV.  Its design was to provide an essentially literal translation without the “woodenness” that is found in many literal translations.  Its language has much of the fluidity of the NIV, but it proves to be much more accurate in its translation.  While it is an excellent Bible for study, it can be daunting particularly for younger Christians as it is written on an eleventh grade reading level.

Foreign Language Translations

            With a vision to place a Bible in their native language in the hands of every man woman and child on the planet, groups like the Wycliffe Bible Translation Society are working at a feverish pace.  Currently, there are complete Bible Translations in better than 500 languages worldwide as well as Bible tracts, which contain portions of scripture, in more than 2000 different languages.  And the process continues.  In some cases, translators must go into a region and create a written language for the culture before translation can even begin.  It is a long and arduous process, but with the aide of computer communication and database technology, the missionaries that God has called into his service are spreading God’s written word even to the most remote regions. 

* * * * *

Admittedly, the flood of translations can be confusing and misleading at times.  Yet, we are privileged to live in a culture where reliable translations are available to us as we have the resources to study more than one translation if we choose.  All too often we take this privilege for granted.  Don’t.  Rather, as you are mourning the flood of less than perfect translations, pray for those who are diligently seeking to provide a complete Bible for cultures who have none.  And pray that those translations, as well as the English translations that we are presented with, would be faithful to the wonderful God we serve. 

            The specific Bible that you choose for Bible study should be a good one, but the particular version that you choose is less important than that you fill your life with God’s word.  There is no excuse for the Christian to be ignorant as to the scriptures, but many professed evangelical Christians are.  Find a translation that you can understand and perhaps a reliable commentary (I recommend starting with Matthew Henry) to help you through tricky verses and to enrich your study.  Then read it, study it, and fall in love with it.